This conference aims at advancing our
understanding of null-subject languages, in
particular of partial pro-drop languages, by
bringing together researchers working on
empirical (synchronic, diachronic and
acquisitional) and theoretical aspects of
pro-drop.

Since Rizzi's (1982) work, it has been known
that there exist different types of
null-subject languages. Roberts & Holmberg
(2010) propose that there exist four types of
pro-drop languages:

- Consistent null-subject languages, such as
Italian and Greek, in which a referential
subject can be dropped in any syntactic
environment
- Radical pro-drop languages, such as Chinese,
Japanese and Korean, in which the presence of a
null-subject correlates with dropping of
nominals in several environments (cf. Huang
1984, Tomioka 2003, Saito 2007, Neeleman &
Szendröi 2007)
- Expletive null-subject languages, such as
standard German, varieties of Dutch and
Afrikaans (cf. Biberauer 2010), in which
expletive, but not referential subjects can be
dropped under certain syntactic conditions
- Partial null-subject languages, such as
Finnish, Brazilian Portuguese and Russian, in
which 'the pronominal subject may remain
unexpressed under restricted conditions
determined by both the morphological and the
syntactic context.' (Roberts/Holmberg
2010:6)

Abstracts should be anonymous and not exceed
two pages (12-point Times New Roman font, with
single spacing and margins of at least 2.54cm/1
inch), including examples and references. They
should be sent as PDF attachment to
federica.cognolaunitn.it. Submissions are limited
to a maximum of one individual and one joint
abstract per author, or two joint abstracts per
author.

c) What is the core property distinguishing
partial from consistent pro-drop languages? Is
the identification of a general class of
partial pro-drop languages empirically
motivated? Can we identify different types of
partial pro-drop languages? What is the status
of generics in partial pro-drop languages (cf.
Holmberg 2005, 2010)?

d) Can acquisition studies help us to determine
what the properties of pro-drop languages
are?

e) It has been claimed that some modern
non-null-subject languages went through periods
in their history in which they allowed for
referential null-subjects (cf. Old English
(OE), van Gelderen 2005, Walkden 2012 a.o.) and
Old High German (OHG, Axel 2007, Axel/Weiss
2011, Schlachter 2012 a.o.). Conversely, Old
Romance (OR) languages have been claimed
(Benincà 1984, Adams 1987, Roberts 1993, Vance
1989, 1993 a.o.) to be asymmetric pro-drop
languages, i.e. languages in which null
subjects are much more frequent in main
clauses, and much rarer in embedded clauses.
What are the conditions determining the
distribution of null subjects in OE, OHG and
OR? Are there any modern varieties which
display such a pro-drop systems? Can OE, OHG
and OR be defined as partial pro-drop languages
in Holmberg's (2005, 2010) sense (cf. Cognola
2013, Waldken 2013)? Why has the system found
in OE, OHG and OR been lost in the modern
varieties?

This Year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise
$75,000. This money will go to help keep the
List running by supporting all of our Student
Editors for the coming year.

See below for donation instructions, and
don't forget to check out Fund Drive 2014
site!

For all information on donating and pledging,
including information on how to donate by
check, money order, PayPal or wire transfer,
please visit: http://linguistlist.org/donation/

The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of
Eastern Michigan University and as such can
receive donations through the EMU Foundation,
which is a registered 501(c) Non Profit
organization. Our Federal Tax number is
38-6005986. These donations can be offset
against your federal and sometimes your state
tax return (U.S. tax payers only). For more
information visit the IRS Web-Site, or
contact your financial advisor.

Many companies also offer a gift matching
program, such that they will match any gift
you make to a non-profit organization.
Normally this entails your contacting your
human resources department and sending us a
form that the EMU Foundation fills in and
returns to your employer. This is generally a
simple administrative procedure that doubles
the value of your gift to LINGUIST, without
costing you an extra penny. Please take a
moment to check if your company operates such
a program.